(1) The Importance of the Family
From all that has been above written it will be seen that there is not any one cause of the sexual delinquency among children which has provoked this inquiry. There are many predisposing and precipitating causes. If there be any common denominator in the majority of cases studied by the Committee it is lack of appreciation by parents of their personal responsibility for the upbringing and behaviour of their children or, if they do appreciate their responsibility, they are unable to guide them correctly and to maintain control of them. This finding is in harmony with the current of public opinion expressed in the statements that "it all comes back to the parents" or "the parents are to blame". That much cannot be gainsaid.
But what is the root cause of this failure or inability on the part of present-day parents? This is an aspect of its assignment to which the Committee has paid great attention.
It should be made quite plain that the Committee does not subscribe to the view that the sexual immorality which has recently been brought to notice is entirely of the pattern which prevailed in former generations. Nor can the Committee be content with platitudinous recommendations as to how this immorality among young persons may be kept in check within the existing processes of the law. It is the view of the Committee that during the past few decades there have been changes in certain aspects of family life throughout the English-speaking world leading to a decline in morality as it has generally been understood. A remedy must be found before this decline leads to the decay of the family itself as the centre and core of our national life and culture.
(2) The Place of the Family in the Legal System
The emphasis which the Committee places upon this section of its report calls for a statement of the place of the family in English law.
The family (meaning thereby the father, mother, and children) from time immemorial has had a definite and recognized status in our national life—a place which it has not always occupied or enjoyed in other cultures and other systems of law. There is in our culture an air of sanctity about the home where parents and children dwell. The rights of a parent against any intrusion into his family affairs have been expressed in such statements as "A man's house is his castle".
Our law of domestic relations centres upon the home. When the Legislature or the law-courts have interfered in the conduct of a home it has only been because one member of the family has failed to discharge the duties which an individual is required to perform towards other members of the family or towards society. Speaking generally, the rights and duties of individual members of the family have been preserved and enforced in our statute law. Illustrations are to be found in the Infants Act, the Destitute Persons Act, the Child Welfare Act, the Family Protection Act, and the Joint Family Homes Act.
The policy of English law is, and always has been, to keep the family together and to uphold the rights of parents. Those rights have correlative duties attaching to them. It is the failure of some parents to perform those duties which has now become a matter of grave concern.
The irony of the situation is that this slipping of parental responsibility has occurred contemporaneously with the granting of financial and other help to parents. Family allowances and State homes should be concomitants of an increased sense of responsibility. Despite all that the State has done, and is doing, for families, the moral standards of the community have somehow been undermined. Is this because of a general lowering of the moral standards of adults? Is the attitude of children towards sexual matters a direct reflection of the thoughts and conduct of their elders? To borrow the words of a Jewish proverb "the apple never falls far from the tree". It has been firmly urged upon the Committee that there has been a "breakdown of the moral order and moral standards". That may be putting the matter too strongly, but there can be no denying the fact that the sanctions of morality today are not as strong as they were, say, forty or fifty years ago.